Dismissed

Usman Ali Ansari v. State of U.P. and Others

Allahabad HC22 May 2018CRLP/18416/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition dismissed against an order by Additional Sessions Judge, Kushinagar, which rejected a police final report and summoned accused persons. The writ court found no illegality in the revision order as no witness statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. supported the accused's involvement.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's writ petition was dismissed, and the Judgment Magistrate was directed to pass an order in compliance with the Sessions Court's order within six months.

Usman Ali Ansari Vs State of U.P. and Others — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18416 of 2012

¶3

Petitioner :- Usman Ali Ansari Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Mishra,Shriprakash Shrivastawa

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

This writ petition has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 08.11.2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Kushinagar at Padrauna, in Criminal Revision No. 135 of 2011 (Rajan Singh v. State and Another), whereby revision against order dated 19.06.2012 passed by Additional Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, Kushinagar was allowed. Vide order dated 19.06.2012, final report submitted by police under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 336, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') was rejected and the accused were summoned for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 352, 336, 504, 506, 427, 323 and 153A of IPC.

¶8

Learned Sessions Judge has observed in the impugned order dated 08.11.2012 that none of the witnesses of fact, in their statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.'), have narrated that the accused (respondent nos. 2-21) have caused injury to five persons namely Salman, Siraj Ullah, Yunus Ali, Mumtaz and Kitabuddin. From the perusal of record, there is no evidence in the entire case diary against the accused. Therefore, cognizance taken by learned Magistrate under Section 190(i)(b) of Cr.P.C. is bad in law. Accordingly, learned Sessions Judge has set aside the impugned order dated 19.06.2012 and remanded the matter to the learned Magistrate with the direction to pass order afresh after hearing the parties on merit.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that five persons had sustained injury, being assaulted by the accused-respondent nos. 2 - 21. Even so, without properly perusing the case diary, impugned order has been passed by learned Sessions Judge.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court.

¶11

Perused the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not specify the name of the witnesses, who, in their statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., have supported the involvement of accused-respondent nos. 2-21 in the aforesaid crime.

¶12

Accordingly, I find no illegality in the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Kushinagar at Padrauna.

¶13

Resultantly, the instant writ petition is dismissed . Learned Judicial Magistrate, Kasya, Kushinagar is directed to pass order afresh in compliance of the impugned order dated 08.11.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Kushinagar at Padrauna without being influenced by the observations/findings of the sessions court or of this Court expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law, within 6 months of the receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶14

Let a copy of this order be certified to the courts below for the purposes of intimation and necessary compliance.

¶15

Order Date :- 22.5.2018 I. Batabyal

Usman Ali Ansari v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usman Ali Ansari v. State of U.P. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.P. Nanda and Another Vs State

Dori Lal Vs State of U.P.

Sushil Vs State and Other

Gul Mohammad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Devanand Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dr. Naresh Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Anr.